Policy SS5 – St. George's Barracks Opportunity Area

Object

Representation ID: 4516

Received: 19/11/2023

Respondent: Mr Christopher Jordan

Comment on RCC Statement on Page 71

“Q13 Option E of the Issues and Options consultation asked about meeting growth through a new settlement, although St George’s was not specifically referenced. 18% of those responding supported this option”

This statement shows clearly that there is very little support for a new settlement in Rutland

Object

Representation ID: 4524

Received: 27/11/2023

Respondent: Mr Christopher Jordan

Is the statement in Policy SS5 "Redevelopment proposals are not expected to deliver more than between 350 and 500 dwellings as part of a mixed-use development" deliverable and viable?

Object

Representation ID: 4533

Received: 30/11/2023

Respondent: Mrs Chloe Surer

I object to see what little country side we have left, be destroyed.

Support

Representation ID: 4537

Received: 23/11/2023

Respondent: Stewart MacDonald

Any new housebuilding required should be on brownfield sites. The St Georges Barracks has the capacity to accommodate all our housing needs and this can then be accompanied with the necessary infrastructure rather than continuing to overload the already stretched infrastructure in the rest of Rutland such as health facilities.

Support

Representation ID: 4548

Received: 01/12/2023

Respondent: Mr Kieran Wade

You should definitely be building your 650 houses here and NOT Quarry Farm in Stamford.

Support

Representation ID: 4550

Received: 01/12/2023

Respondent: Miss Carys Vaughan

I support development here as it does provide a good opportunity for Rutland to meet much of its housing needs and it would be a good way to make effective use of the barracks whilst preserving more biodiverse parts of Rutland. However, I am not happy that development on Quarry Farm has been prioritised in this plan period over development here as Quarry Farm is much smaller but the density of housing proposed is far greater. It also has more biodiversity value than St George’s barracks.

Support

Representation ID: 4558

Received: 01/12/2023

Respondent: Mr Kevin Corby

St Georges is a brownfield site, and should be developed following the eventual departure of the MOD. Ideal site for expansion and larger scale mixed development of homes for Rutland along with services infrastructure.

Support

Representation ID: 4567

Received: 01/12/2023

Respondent: Mrs Kim Conlon

It is a site that has already been developed. It give access to both Stamford and Oakham

Support

Representation ID: 4577

Received: 02/12/2023

Respondent: Mr Kevin Rippin

This area is a Brown field site and should be used for Development unlike the proposal on Quarry Farm which should be left as is !!!!

Support

Representation ID: 4582

Received: 02/12/2023

Respondent: Mrs Bridget Queiros

It makes much more sense to develop this existing large site to meet housing needs in a positive use of existing developed land rather than destroying greenfield sites at Quarry Farm for example. The latter is a cynical plan to reduce Rutland's ongoing cost commitments as residents of the proposed Quarry Farm development will be using service in Stamford and not Rutland.!

Support

Representation ID: 4588

Received: 02/12/2023

Respondent: Mr Leonard Marshall

If this area is part of the current plan, and as a much greater area, and being a brownfield site with little biodiversity, it should replace Stamford North and be brought forward swiftly to early development....within the current plan.

Support

Representation ID: 4599

Received: 04/12/2023

Respondent: Mrs Amanda Hoskins

This site is far better suited for housing than Quarry Farm in Stamford. It is a brownfield site and much bigger. It will not impact on its immediate neighbourhood as Quarry Farm will. This needs to be looked at now and take priority for housing development over Quarry Farm.

Support

Representation ID: 4622

Received: 04/12/2023

Respondent: Mrs Catherine Leeks

Any new housebuilding required should be on brownfield sites. The St Georges Barracks has the capacity to accommodate all your housing needs and this can then be accompanied with the necessary infrastructure rather building on a Green space candidate wildlife site at Quarry farm. You yourselves in your local plan put huge emphasis on environment. Is building on Quarry Farm conducive with your own stated aims?

Support

Representation ID: 4629

Received: 04/12/2023

Respondent: Mrs Debbie Tuisavura

Surely, anyone can see that this site is far superior to Quarry farm fir building houses as it would not have the same impact on the locality and would leave a wildlife haven well alone

Support

Representation ID: 4634

Received: 04/12/2023

Respondent: Mr James Owens

I am surprised it has not been brought forward in this planing period as it seems an appropriate place to build.

Support

Representation ID: 4638

Received: 05/12/2023

Respondent: Jane Bateman

I support development on land that was previously St George's Barracks with the caveat that it has priority over development on Quarry Farm.
In my view it is very unfair that Quarry Farm has been included in Rutland's local plan when it is really part of Stamford. Rutland CC will get all the gains if Quarry Farms goes ahead especially in terms of money, council tax, etc and Stamford will get all the negatives. There are brownfield sites in Rutland including St George's Barracks so these should be prioritised over Quarry Farm.

Support

Representation ID: 4644

Received: 06/12/2023

Respondent: Mrs Alison Lowe

I would support this development as its a large brownfield site and better suited to meeting Rutland's housing needs than Quarry Farm/Monarch Park Stamford which is a candidate wildlife site and an important green space for Stamford. St George's Barracks should be considered for development by Rutland CC in this planning period and .take priority over Quarry Farm/Monarch Park due to its inferior biodiversity value

Support

Representation ID: 4648

Received: 06/12/2023

Respondent: Mr Philip Lowe

This development is better suited to meet Rutland housing needs than quarry farm due to its size and inferior biodiversity value. It should be brought forward earlier for development and be included in this local plan period rather than quarry farm

Support

Representation ID: 4652

Received: 07/12/2023

Respondent: Mr Duncan Farrell

St Georges is a vast area that could in reality accomadate all of the housing requirements of Rutland. It has as an ex military base already a fair bit of infrastructure, roads that it would use flow onto what are extreamly uncongested roads. The village in the past was used to a lot more people living in the bases and using the roads, it has the capacity to accomadate this. The area is a brownfield site with little eccological benefit meaning it dosent masssivly affect wildlife or farming, it is essentially wasteland. Please make this the priority going forward. This should be the main focus for development and it should be built on quickly, Not in 2041.

Support

Representation ID: 4660

Received: 07/12/2023

Respondent: Kayleigh Nicolaou

I support this development as an alternative development site to Quarry Farm site. It is better suited to meet Rutland’s Housing due to it's size and the fact that it is not as biodiverse as Quarry Farm so will not impact on the natural environment and fauna and flora to the same level. Based on that, this development site should be priority over Quarry Farm.

Support

Representation ID: 4665

Received: 07/12/2023

Respondent: Mrs Karen Neale

Building homes needed in Rutland on this brownfield site makes more environmental sense and in keeping with the Council's environmental policies, than the disturbance and destruction of the precious environmental area of Quarry Farm.

Support

Representation ID: 4682

Received: 09/12/2023

Respondent: Mr Barry Collins

This seems best option for Rutland as it already has the infrastructure in place without putting pressure on Stamford’s already overwhelmed facilities.

Support

Representation ID: 4713

Received: 11/12/2023

Respondent: Mr Chris Wright

If this helps Rutland CC meet their housing targets, then I support it, as their other proposal of Quarry Farm is ludicrous! Developing St George's Barracks will prevent it becoming a wasteland for future generations.

Support

Representation ID: 4716

Received: 10/12/2023

Respondent: Mr Tim Collins

I would like to support the policy and in particular that element that sets a limit of no more than 350 to 500 dwellings for the redeveloped site. I also welcome the inclusion of the detailed policy clauses as part of this policy, including those offering protection to the heritage assets at the site and to the protection of the site’s natural
environment. I believe a number of additional clauses should be added:

a. Given that this is a publicly owned site (and therefore a redevelopment that can provide leadership by example) I would also like to see the inclusion of a policy clause mandating the inclusion of an average of 2 integral swift bricks in each new dwelling at this site (with pro
rata application, by area, to non-residential development).

b. A clause to ensure improved waste water management so preventing increased nutrient enrichment of Lyndon Brook (the existing sewage treatment discharges in to this stream)and the River Chater. Ideally the upper dated sewage treatment works should contribute to
a reduction in nutrient loading; it would be preferable if it included reedbed filtration as a final stage so helping clean the discharged water and delivering a small biodiversity benefit.

c. A clause to restrict storm water discharges in to the tributaries of Lyndon Brook. The existing storm drains from St.George’s Barracks have led to over deepening of at least one ditch system and to the deepening of Lyndon Brook itself.

Support

Representation ID: 4734

Received: 12/12/2023

Respondent: Mrs Sandra Owens

This is a large area that seems suitable for larger scale development given that it will soon be disbanded as an operational barracks and therefore has potential to repurposed into a sustainable development. To be honest, I am surprised Rutland are waiting until after 2041 to consider building here as a good part of Rutland’s housing targets could be delivered here and would take the pressure off building on other less suitable sites, such as the much more biodiverse Quarry Farm.

Object

Representation ID: 4774

Received: 11/12/2023

Respondent: Alistair Parker

The identification of the entire of the St George Barracks as a brownfield Opportunity Site is incorrect given the use over the entire ceased 26 years ago and that the implicit allocation of further 350-500 units on St George’s is of a totally inappropriate scale for a village of 380 households (SS5)

Object

Representation ID: 4780

Received: 16/12/2023

Respondent: Mr Christopher Jordan

The northwestern corner of the site contained within the current barracks security fence is approximately 49 hectares which is roughly 20% of the 265 hectares total site. Development should be considered in this area only. This would greatly reduce the visual impact due to the existing mature trees and hedgerow blocking the view into the site

As stated by RCC the remaining 80% of the site is subject to ecological, geological and heritage constraints which would significantly restrict opportunities for re-use or redevelopment

I await the masterplan with the status of a Development Plan Document being issued for comment

Support

Representation ID: 4798

Received: 19/12/2023

Respondent: Mr Gareth Vaughan

I think this should be considered for development in this plan period. Given the need to build more houses in suitable places surely this site provides the perfect opportunity to do just that? I don’t understand why there is the need to wait until after 2041 especially given the enthusiasm the council has for building in more inappropriate places, such as Quarry Farm. Why push Quarry Farm through which is half the size, more biodiverse & will have double the housing yet wait on this?

Support

Representation ID: 4802

Received: 19/12/2023

Respondent: Stamford Town Council

This is the perfect site for a future development so should be included as a full allocation in the Local Plan. A Memorandum of Understanding has been created already between RCC and the MOD for the use of this site, post-closure, for residential development and was proposed for the Local Plan that was rejected recently. With a potential 2200 homes, based on the evolving Masterplan, which would still leave an area of 160 hectares after residential development for other uses.

Support

Representation ID: 4888

Received: 24/12/2023

Respondent: Ms Sue Milsom

St George’s Barracks is a brownfield site twice the size of Quarry farm with none of the biodiversity that Quarry farm has. Therefore it should be considered for housing instead of Quarry farm now to stop the destruction of a beautiful open coin and drive more strain and congestion into Stamford